PRODUCTION AND MARKETING OF CAGE REARED TILAPIA
OREOCHROMIS NILOTICUS IN TAAL LAKE, AGONCILLO, BATANGAS
R. De La Cruz-Del Mundo1, P. Del Mundo2, M. Gorospe2
and R. Macas3
1Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, 860 Arcadia Building, Quezon Avenue, Quezon City, Philippines
2Office of the Provincial Agriculturist, Batangas City, Philippines
3Department of Agriculture Regional Field Office IV, Quezon City, Philippines
ABSTRACT
Tilapia culture contributes significantly to aquaculture production in the Philippines. The country produced 81,182 metric tons of farmed tilapia in 1995. The cultivation of tilapia was introduced in Taal Lake in the 70's. Presently, more than 1,000 fish cages exist in the lake. The fish cages cover almost 7% of the lake area. Production of cage reared tilapia reaches more or less 6,000 MT/year.
With the rapidly developing tilapia industry, Nile tilapia culture became popular in Taal Lake, Agoncillo, Batangas. From 1994-1996, culture trials of cage reared tilapia were performed in Agoncillo, Batangas. This paper provides results of the culture trials which include production data, cost and return and estimate of investment for tilapia cages. Furthermore, this paper contains information on market, distribution channels and price of the product.
INTRODUCTION
Tilapia is important for its value as a food commodity. It is a cheap source of protein, is available throughout the year; and is considered an important aquatic species for fish culture in the Philippines.
Tilapia production from aquaculture in 1995 has reached 81,182 MT. Its production from fish cages reached 32,579 MT. Highest producers of tilapia from fish cages were Regions IV 55 % (17,911 MT), V 33% (10,853 MT), XI 7% (2,378 MT) and CAR 3% (1,076 MT) (BFAR, 1995).
In Taal Lake, tilapia culture started in the seventies (70's) when the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) Region 4 initiated culture of Tilapia and Maliputo (Caranx ignobilis) in net cages. However, the technology was adopted only in the late eighties (1980's) when a Taiwanese begun feeding his tilapia in pens located at San Nicolas and Agoncillo Pansipit river. Realizing that tilapia could be profitable, people near the river bank started to set up their fish cages. When the local government granted, through concession, the use of Pansipit River to a private company, people transferred and set up their fish cages in Taal Lake. From early 1993 onwards, there is tremendous growth of tilapia cage culture especially when the government allowed local people to set up cages in the fish sanctuary Agoncillo.
The objectives of the study are as follows:
a) to determine tilapia production in cage culture trials conducted from 1994-1996;
b) to calculate cost and return, cost estimate of investment of cage culture trials; and
c) to describe marketing cage reared tilapia.
METHODOLOGY
Description of the study area
Taal Lake with an area of approximately 24,356 hectares is the third largest lake in the Philippines. Located in the Batangas Province, it is situated in southwestern Luzon between 120o 55' to 121o 05' east and 13o 55' to 14o 05 north. It is bounded by the towns of Tanauan, Talisay, Mataas na Kahoy, Cuenca, Alitagtag, San Nicolas, Lipa, Balete, Agoncillo and Laurel (Acedera, 1993).
Culture trials were conducted in fish cages set up in Barangay Bilibinwang, Agoncillo, Batangas.
Description of the fish cage
Floating type fish cages were used in the culture trials. Two fish cages were used for culture trials conducted from 1994-1996. Each cage is composed of fish net measuring 12x15x6 m suspended in bamboo float. The bamboo float consisted of four (4) rafts made out of 8-10 pieces bamboo poles. The bamboo poles are tied together with wood sticks nailed on its bottom and sides by nylon monofilament. The fish cage is anchored to the bottom by sand bags tied by ropes.
Stocking
Tilapia fingerlings were stocked in fish cages early in the morning with stocking density range between 16,000 to 40,000 pieces per cage. About 3-5 grams fingerling size was used. The fingerlings were conditioned in hapa net one day after arrival. Head counting is done by sampling a kilo of fish. The estimated number of fish stock is determined by multiplying the total weight of fish stock to head count per kilo.
Feeding
Fish were reared in cages for 3 to 6 months. They were fed with formulated diet. Commercial feeds (26% protein content) brought from local feed dealers were used The feeds were given three times a day to the fish. Different feed types were given to the tilapia at different growing stage. The feeds are given by broadcast method. Apparent Feed Conversion Ratio (AFCR) is calculated by the total volume of harvest and the total volume of feed consumed.
Rearing and care of stock
During fish rearing moribund fish were monitored and collected by fish cage caretakers. Fish cages were also inspected for damages.
Harvesting
The tilapias were harvested when they reached marketable size of 100-200 grams. One side of the fish cage was lifted and selective harvest net sewn to the fish cage. Fish of larger sizes were filtered to a mesh size 5 net. After taking larger fish, the remaining fish were then filtered to a mesh size 6 net and gathered in harvest net bags or smaller floating cage.
After harvest, fish were chilled and sorted according to size and quality. Good quality tilapia were packed in plastic or styrofoam boxes with ice, at 40 kg per container. Undersize and poor quality tilapia (light colored) were valued at 70 % of the price of good and regular size tilapias.
Marketing
Fish marketing study was based on actual sale of fish at Malabon fish landing site.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows the result of tilapia production per cropping period. Tilapia production in cage ranged from 1,575 Kg to 3,967 Kg. Highest production was attained in cage 2 during the first cropping in 1995. The lowest volume of harvest was in cage 1 during the second cropping in 1995. The average production per year of tilapia was 2.8 T, 2.7 T, and 2.6 T for 1994, 1995, and 1996 respectively. The average body weight of fish harvested ranged from 143-219 grams.
Table 1.Production data of Nile tilapia in cage culture trials from 1994-1996.
YEARCrop / CP / SR / SD / Harvest / Feeds
ABW / Vol / No / SR / Vol / AFCR
1994
Cage1crop1 / 110 / 22 / 20,000 / 219 / 2,907 / 13,247 / 66 / 6,575 / 2.3
1994
Cage1crop2 / 112 / 18 / 16,000 / 200 / 2,260 / 11,300 / 71 / 4,300 / 1.9
1994
Cage1crop3 / 97 / 28 / 25,277 / 167 / 3,634 / 21,804 / 86 / 5,950 / 1.6
Mean / 106 / 23 / 20,426 / 195 / 2,934 / 15,450 / 74 / 5,608 / 1.9
1994
Cage2crop1 / 111 / 22 / 20,000 / 208 / 2,765 / 13,321 / 67 / 6,575 / 2.4
1994
Cage2crop2 / 112 / 22 / 20,000 / 143 / 2,060 / 14,420 / 72 / 4,175 / 2.0
1994
Cage2crop3 / 97 / 24 / 21,205 / 194 / 3,339 / 17,214 / 81 / 4,400 / 1.3
Mean / 107 / 23 / 20,402 / 182 / 2,721 / 14,985 / 73 / 5,050 / 1.9
1995
Cage1crop1 / 98 / 46 / 41,364 / 143 / 3,127 / 21,903 / 53 / 5,975 / 1.9
1995
Cage1crop2 / 182 / 34 / 30,150 / 143 / 1,575 / 11,025 / 36 / 3,025 / 1.9
Mean / 140 / 40 / 35,757 / 143 / 2,351 / 16,464 / 44 / 4,500 / 1.9
1995
Cage2crop1 / 98 / 46 / 41,364 / 143 / 3,967 / 27,768 / 67 / 6,325 / 1.6
1995
Cage2crop2 / 182 / 32 / 29,290 / 143 / 2,087 / 14,609 / 50 / 3,800 / 1.8
Mean / 140 / 39 / 35,327 / 143 / 3,027 / 21,188 / 58 / 5,062 / 1.7
1996
Cage1crop1 / 122 / 33 / 29,925 / 143 / 2,911 / 20,377 / 68 / 5,575 / 1.9
1996
Cage1crop2 / 118 / 22 / 20,000 / 167 / 2,442 / 14,652 / 73 / 4,750 / 1.9
Mean / 120 / 28 / 24,962 / 155 / 2,676 / 17,514 / 70 / 5,162 / 1.9
1996
Cage2crop1 / 122 / 22 / 20,000 / 167 / 2,469 / 14,814 / 74 / 4,850 / 2.0
1996
Cage2crop2 / 118 / 22 / 20,000 / 167 / 2,676 / 16,056 / 80 / 4,800 / 1.8
Mean / 120 / 22 / 20,000 / 167 / 2,572 / 15,435 / 77 / 4,825 / 1.9
The average survival rates for cage 1 were 75% (1994), 44% (1995) and 70% (1996), while the average survival rates for cage 2 were 73% (1994), 58% (1995) and 77% (1996). Low survival of 36 % was observed in cage 1 during second cropping in 1995. Likewise, low tilapia production was also observed in the same cage.
Feed conversion ratio (FCR) varies in cage reared tilapias. Average feed conversion ratios were 1.9 (1994 & 1996 cages 1 & 2, and 1995 cage 1) and 1.7 (1995 cage 2). The cost of investment for 1 fish cage from 1994-1996 was presented in Table 2. The cost of fish cage increased to about 10% each year, but did not affect profit.
Table 2 Cost of Investment for 1 unit fish cage, 1994-1996
Quantity / Unit / Particulars / 1994 / 1995 / 19961 / roll / fish net / 4,750 / 5,300 / 6,400
60 / pcs / bamboo / 3,000 / 3,900 / 4,200
100 / pcs / wood sticks / 600 / 600 / 700
1 / roll / no. 16 PE rope / 338 / 380 / 380
1 / roll / no. 10 PE rope / 180 / 180 / 180
5 / Kg / nylon monofilament / 600 / 600 / 600
1 / spool / 210/10 / 95 / 100 / 100
50 / pcs / sacks / 105 / 150 / 150
5 / kg / nails / 100 / 125 / 125
1 / roll / 16 mm rope / 916 / 1,600 / 1,800
labor / 2,400 / 3,000 / 3,000
T o t a l / 13,084 / 15,785 / 17,635
Total cost of fish cage culture in the study comprises fixed costs and variable costs. Fixed costs include investment cost for 1 unit fish cage rent and labor for weed removal, while variable costs include cost of fingerlings, commercial feeds and labor (caretakers). In this analysis, fixed cost was deducted from the total returns in the first cropping. Variable cost is incurred for each cropping.
Table 3 shows the cost and return of tilapia cage culture in 1994. Cage 1 & 2 incurred 17,584 PHP for the fixed cost which consists of 74.4 % investment for 1 unit fish cage (IC), 17.1 % rent and 18.5% weed removal. Variable cost amounts to 291,225 for cage 1 and 266,064 PHP for cage 2. Total cost incurred from cage 1 and 2 are 313,809 PHP and 283,558 PHP respectively. The average net profit obtained for cage 1 and 2 is 54,288 PHP. This result suggests that tilapia culture is profitable.
Table 3. Cost and return of Tilapia cage culture, 1994.
YEARCrop / Gross Sales / Fixed Cost / Variable Cost / Total / Net Return
1994 / IC / rent / weed removal / fingerling / feeds / labor
Cage 1
crop 1 / 139,012 / 13,084 / 1,000 / 500 / 10,000 / 72,085 / 21,172 / 117,841 / 21,171
Cage 1
crop 2 / 94,484 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 12,320 / 49,370 / 15,647 / 78,837 / 15,647
Cage 1
crop 3 / 145,930 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 19,081 / 67,750 / 28,800 / 117,131 / 28,799
Total / 379,426 / 13,084 / 3,000 / 1,500 / 41,401 / 189,205 / 65,619 / 313,809 / 65,617
Cage 2
crop 1 / 131,722 / 13,084 / 1,000 / 500 / 10,000 / 72,085 / 17,526 / 114,195 / 17,527
Cage 2
crop 2 / 86,135 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 13,000 / 47,950 / 11,842 / 74,292 / 11,843
Cage 2
crop 3 / 108,750 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 14,893 / 65,178 / 13,590 / 95,071 / 13,589
Total / 326,607 / 13,084 / 3,000 / 1,500 / 37,893 / 185,213 / 42,958 / 283,558 / 42,959
In contrast to the first culture trials, 1995 results show low profit in cage 1 and cage 2. Net profits obtained from cage 1 and 2 are 2,351 and 23,474 respectively. The negative returns from the second crop in cage 1 and 2 affect profit.
Table 4. Cost and return of tilapia cage culture, 1995.
YEARCrop / Gross Sales / Fixed Cost / Variable Cost / Total / Net Return
1995 / IC / rent / weed removal / fingerling / feeds / labor
Cage 1
crop 1 / 146,289 / 15,785 / 1,000 / 500 / 28,128 / 68,400 / 16,238 / 130,051 / 16,238
Cage 1
crop 2 / 53,565 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 18,729 / 47,215 / - / 67,444 / (13,879)
Total / 199,854 / 15,785 / 2,000 / 1,000 / 46,857 / 115,615 / 16,238 / 197,495 / 2,351
Cage 2
crop 1 / 193,033 / 15,785 / 1,000 / 500 / 28,128 / 72,540 / 37,540 / 155,493 / 37,540
Cage 2
crop 2 / 65,956 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 22,847 / 55,675 / - / 80,022 / (14,066)
Total / 258,989 / 15,785 / 2,000 / 1,000 / 50,975 / 128,215 / 37,540 / 235,515 / 23,474
Table 5. shows cost and return of tilapia cage culture in 1996. Fixed cost of 20,635 PHP was incurred in cage 1 and 2. This consists of 85.5 % investment for 1 unit fish cage, 9.7% of rent and 4.8% weed removal. Variable cost incurred in cage 1 and 2 are 192,740 and 207,977 PHP respectively. Feeds comprises 65-70% of the variable cost. Total cost incurred from cage 1 and 2 are 213,375 and 112,064 respectively, while net profit obtained from cage 1 and 2 are 39,128 and 38,554 PHP.
Table 5. Cost and return of tilapia cage culture, 1996.
YEARCrop / Gross Sales / Fixed Cost / Variable Cost / Total / Net Return
1996 / IC / rent / weed removal / fingerling / feeds / labor
Cage 1
crop 1 / 141,617 / 17,635 / 1,000 / 500 / 15,860 / 67,574 / 19,524 / 122,093 / 19,524
Cage 1
crop 2 / 110,886 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 12,000 / 58,178 / 19,604 / 91,282 / 19,604
Total / 252,503 / 17,635 / 2,000 / 1,000 / 27,860 / 125,752 / 39,128 / 213,375 / 39,128
Cage 2
crop 1 / 130,899 / 17,635 / 1,000 / 500 / 12,000 / 71,063 / 14,350 / 116,548 / 14,351
Cage 2
crop 2 / 136,267 / - / 1,000 / 500 / 12,000 / 74,360 / 24,204 / 112,064 / 24,203
Total / 267,166 / 17,635 / 2,000 / 1,000 / 24,000 / 145,423 / 38,554 / 228,612 / 38,554
Prices of tilapia fluctuates from the first cropping to last cropping period. Price of tilapia is high during the first quarter then, it gradually decreases from the second quarter to the last quarter of the year. In 1994, average price of tilapia is 48, 42 and 40 PHP during the first, second and third cropping period. Average price of tilapia decreased from 48 to 33 PHP during the first and second cropping period in 1995, likewise it decreased from 51 to 48 PHP in the first and second cropping of 1996 respectively. It indicates that low price affects profit.
The harvested tilapias in the study were sold in Malabon, Metro Manila. Prior to fish transport fish are received in containers. Then the tilapias were brought in the fish landing site where fish are sold to middlemen/wholesaler who in turn sell fish to retailer and consumers. Fish brokers collect five (5) % from gross sale of tilapia.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study showed tilapia cage production in Bilibinwang, Agoncillo is high and tilapia culture is a profitable business. Furthermore, fish survival highly affects fish production and profit.
Fish farmers engaged in tilapia culture should monitor farm production. In fish cages, feeds are used in great quantities. This activity can bring about enrichment of the lake. Therefore, it is important to consider environmental change associated with waste from tilapia cage in future studies. Government should help in reducing cost of feeds as incentive to tilapia farmers.
Furthermore, local government should promote proper farm management and fish culture to tilapia farmers. Problems on stress and fish diseases could be avoided with proper farm management and fish culture.
References
Acedera, M.A. 1993. An assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed water resource development project on the lake water and aquaculture industry of Taal lake Batangas Province. M.S. Thesis. University of the Philippines Los Banos Laguna April 1993. 104 pp.
Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR). 1990. A guide for fish handling, marketing and distribution. Fisheries Extension Series no.9 Department of Agriculture 28 p.
______. 1995. Philippine fisheries profile. Department of Agriculture.48 p.
Head, W.D., Zerbi, A. and Watanabe, W.O. 1996. "Economic evaluation of commercial-scale, saltwater pond production of Florida red tilapia in Puerto Rico." Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. Vol.27. no3. September 1996. p 275-289.
Santos, R.A.V. 1993. Environmental assessment of fishpen culture in Pansipit river (Brangay Poblacion, San Nicolas, Batangas) M.S. Thesis University of the Philippines. Los Banos Laguna. April 1993.